Wednesday, November 26, 2008

AWT and the quest for HT superconductivity

The interpretation of high temperature superconductivity by Aether theory is surprisingly easy - so it's apparent, just the common skepticism in particle models in physics has caused, such interpretation wasn't considered before years already. The forces between highly compressed electrons are compensating mutually, which leads into chaotic motion of charged particles, where energy can propagate in waves only, i.e. via bosons, formed by foamy particle condensate. Such system is indeed difficult to handle by explicit formal models indeed - but ab-initio computer simulations of quantum waves of many particles should reveal this behavior without problem - it's somewhat surprising, they weren't made already even in context of existing theories.

Anyway, to prepare condensed electron system isn't so trivial, as the "slippery" electrons cannot be simply compressed inside of vessel by piston, because they can pass through matter rather freely. For this purpose we can use a positively charged atoms, which attracts the electrons like money thrown into crowd attracts the people - the moment, when people starts to fight for free access is an analogy of quantum chaos, which we want form in electron cloud. The hole dopant atoms in semiconductor lattice can play a role of bait for electrons: the large group of holes attracts neighboring electrons, so they condensing around them. This model considers, electrons can move rather freely through lattice:

Unfortunately, the formation of isolated islands of condensed electrons isn't enough for establishing of superconductivity. Instead of this, so called the pseudogap state is formed, when the material exhibits most of bulk properties characteristic for true superconductors, but still hasn't a zero resistivity - this behavior is still a puzzle for mainstream physics, although its interpretation is easy in AWT. The increasing of hole density in general leads to the decreasing of the pressure inside of spherical islands and formation of metallic state, which is non-superconductive in general (the metals with spherical Fermi surface aren't good in superconductivity in general). Instead of this, a highly asymmetric lattices are preferred here, which are enabling the formation so called hole stripes. Under proper doping level, a less or more continuous superconducting phase can be formed successfully. The relatively sparse superlattice character of YBaCuO mixed oxide structure provides necessary distance separation of hole stripes. Repulsive forces of electrons inside of stripes must remain balanced by binding forces of remaining atoms.

It's apparent, the true room temperature superconductors must be formed a 3D superlattice of holes, injected into material in nanometer resolution - which isn't so easy to produce by contemporary technologies inside of regular crystals. Foam character of electron condensate manifests by formation of double walled anti-parallel spin domains along hole stripes in accordance to Colin Humphreys theory. We can consider them as a product of many Cooper pairs condensation along hole stripes, so that BCS/BEC theories still have their common point here.

The increasing level of doping manifests itself by transition from semi-ordered anti-ferromagnetic state in which magnetic layers are interspersed with non-magnetic layers. When the doping level is increased, magnetic ordering is suppressed on behalf of chaotic Fermi fluid near hole stripes and pseudogap in volume phase manifests itself. When the doping level increases even more, the pressure of neighboring atoms and degree of electron condensation may not be sufficient to maintain chaotic state anymore and the superconductor goes to metallic or even nonconducting state again. Bellow is the example of fractal principle, in which hole superlattices can be produced from ceramic precursors.

The surprising consequence of Aether model of HT superconductivity is, formation of superconductive phase isn't restricted just to solid phase. The electrons can condense even along surface of doped semiconductors, thus forming a superconductive channels around it. In such case, the formation of superconductive phase is even much more easier due the absence of atoms, prohibiting in electron free motion. It's virtually whole new approach to superconductivity at all.

Surprisingly enough, this mechanism was already revealed by prof. Johan F. Prins in 2002, who studied ion injection into diamonds (NS article, refusal). The n-doped diamonds are known for their very low work function due the strength of covalent C-C bonds. Therefore n-doped diamond binds a redundant electrons weakly and it can serve as a material for cold discharge cathodes, for example. At the moment, some oxygen ions are injected into diamond lattice by using of high voltage discharge, the hole atoms are attracting the surface electrons by such a way, they create a superconductive channels at the surface of diamond, which can be manifested both by zero resistivity in micrometer scale, both by Meissner-Ochsenfeldeffect, because the surface of plasma treated diamonds repels the magnetic micro-particles reportedly.

Surprisingly these fundamental findings have met with rather low attention in scientific community so far, probably due somewhat dissenter approach of prof. Prins toward mainstream science, the quantum mechanics and BSC theory in particular (1, 2 -the fact, some theory cannot be applied to particular situation doesn't always mean, this theory is wrong). We can met with the same situation here, like at the case of Heim theory, antigravity or cold fusion research: the hysteresis of skepticism and peer-review based approach of mainstream science isn't very good in separation of progressive ideas from these crackpot ones. Of course, the delays in research resulting from pathological skepticism are of the very same cost, like the false belief in void speculations - they just cannot be calculated by explicit way.

20 comments:

We can propose some popular/real life analogies of this model. Try to imagine, you’re walking with your wife along one way street full of stores. Under low traffic situation such walk may get costly, because women tends to stop in each store, being attracted by goods, exposed here in shop windows…

When street becomes full of people, then the walking along footway may become a slower, but much more fluent and cheaper paradoxically, because shop windows are already surrounded by many people, so your partner has no chance to stop here for prolonged time.

I noted the post by Zephir, quoting my reseach. Although the superconducting phase that I have discovered between n-type diamond and an anode, differs from those that are formed within materials like metals and HTS materials, the theories used to describe the latter materials are in fact incorrect. The Aharanov-Bohm effect used to model flux quatization can be shown not to occur by means of the mechanism that Aharanov and Bohm proposed. In fact their thought experiments violate physical concepts which have been taught in undergraduate classes for more than a century. It even violates the Copenhagen interpretation. The fact that electron-diffraction lines do shift when a magnetic field is present behind the diffraction-slits is caused by another mechanism; which can be modelled in terms of Ehrenfest's theorem. Cooper pairs is a figment of Cooper's imagination, but since they stem from Quantum Field Theory, which won Nobel Prizes, I cannot get my model published anywhere. Not even the Royal Society which was supposedly started to prevent another Galileo-episode, wants to allow another scientifically well founded model through. The "earth does not move" and that is that! We do not allow any other argument.Anybody who would like to know how superconduction within the metals AND HTS really occurs (by the way it is the same mechanism) is welcome to contact me directly at johanprins@cathodixx.com

The AWT model of HT superconductivity doesn't mean, older theories of low temperature superconductivity are wrong - they simply cannot be applied to high temperature superconductivity and vice-versa.

n fact, if we look to pseudogap state thoroughly, we still would see a traces of low temperature pairing in accordance to Colin Humphreys theory.

In this theory superconductivity occurs because these hole-pairs march collectively along the channels, like trams on pairs of tramlines running between the blocks of houses. There is one hole on each tramline, according to the model, and the pairs of holes move down the channels, hopping from oxygen to oxygen via adjacent copper sites. These structures are clearly visible on the above picture.

It means, electrons aren't moving in pairs through high temperature superconductor, but in "homosexual groups", which are still paired at the more general level. Highest temperature superconductor achievable would contain 1D lattice of Dirac's strings of spin separated electrons aligned along whole length of superconductor.

The similar stuff exists in superfluous helium, where atoms are forming vortex pairs under low Reynolds number. High temperature superconductivity correspond the turbulent flow in quantum fluids, where stripes of quantum vortices are formed in analogy to hole stripes in cuprates.

This is how Cooper pair analogy appears in superfluid hellium - it forms vortex pairs coupled tighly by their spins:

It means, high temperature superconductors are related to low temperature ones in similar way, like the 3He-A superfluid is related to 4He superfluid. This analogy is quite exact - it's just two-dimensional. If we didn't observe Cooper pair superconductivity, we should find it, because such mechanism exists in superfluid, too.

Of course, real 3He-A superfluid consist of dynamic mixture of vortex stripes and individual vortex pairs in similar way, like high temperature superconductors exhibits both dimers, both polymer. Ferromagnetic superconductors are specific by their higher portion of spin-spin interactions via d orbitals, i.e. pycknides are more pronounced type I superconductors, then cuprates - just the lattice vibrations are replaced by antiferromagnetic fluctuations there.

Diamond layers with implanted holes demonstrated superconductivity at room temperature already. The mechanical strength of diamond films enables to bind electrons to their surface in such strong way, the electrons will overcome their repulsive forces, so they behave in similar way, like atoms in boson condensate at low temperature.

http://www.physorg.com/news185372725.html

This is extremely interesting result even with respect to quantum computing, because it would enable to maintain entangled states of electrons at room temperature. With respect to high price of diamond films such usage could become ever more significant, then the superconductivity applications.

Physicist Johan Prins conducted an experiment to develop a superconductor that worked at room temperature. He used a layer of synthetic diamond doped with oxygen atoms, and by applying a voltage to the gold-plated probe above the surface of the diamond, he was able to draw electrons out of the diamond into the vacuum which completed the circuit. In opinion of Archie Campbell, Cambridge, UK it would be quite impossible to detect superconductivity with his measurements.

In his experiment Johan Prins found that the current through his crystal did not change detectably when the thickness of the vacuum gap between the diamond and positively charged probe was reduced to zero. Since he was applying 1000 volts and drawing only half a milliamp, the resistance of his circuit was 2 megohms. And since the noise in his current was at least 1 per cent, any resistance in the gap less than 20 kilohms would be undetectable.

If the gap were made of copper the resistance would be about 0.04 micro-ohms, so the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the resistivity of the electron gas is no greater than around 10+11 times that of copper. This cannot be regarded as evidence of superconductivity.

A review article on the theoretical aspects of the high-Tc cuprate superconductors, and why it is such a complex system that a single accepted theoretical description still evades us after 20 years of its discovery.

In Korean journal Schrieffer exactly wrote down the reason why BCS could not predict High Temperature Superconductors in 1997 already. Becouse Bardeen and CS thought, that "electrons and phonons do not couple through uniformly translation of the lattice".

The relative permitivity of superconductive stripes is negative so the permitivity of the bulk superconductor is zero (the external electric field always results in zero electric intensity within the material). These guys are reinventing the wheel - and they even don't know about it...;-P

Because the electrons within graphene do behave like the material with negative permitivity too, it's possible, that the above mechanism could explain the recently observed superconductivity of graphite soaked with water, because the water is the material of relatively high relative permitivity. If it's so, then the mixing of graphite with even higher polar fluid, like the sulphoxide, dimethylformamide or even HMTPA could improve this effect significantly (not to say, these fluids are far less volatile, so that the resulting material would be more stable.)

So, we have room superconductivity finding at surface of diamond (1) - never attempted to replicate. We have negative or zero resistance of carbon fibers (2) - never attempted to replicate. We have the room superconductivity finding for copper oxides (3) - never attempted to replicate. Now we have the room superconductivity finding for graphene flakes (4) - I'm just interested, when this finding will be attempted to replicate in peer-review press. If it wouldn't, then we can say safely, the mainstream physics has actually zero interest about room superconductivity.

Francesco Celani started to study Superconducting Tunnel Junctions (Ni-Pb; T=4.2K) and he found intriguing results using thick junctions on 1985. One of these were contaminated (by chance) from several other elements and showed behaviour similar to superconductivity even at temperature as large as 77K (Ln2). It was stated a multi-disciplinary commission in order to clarify the origin of this effect. Unfortunately the results were rejected, because in disagreement with the BCS model/theory (for which the max. temperature of superconductivity stated at 32K). One year later Bednorz and Muller (from IBM, Zurich), independently (and starting from different points of view), found similar results in Cuprate oxides mixed with rare-hearts and got Nobel Prize for it.